Author Topic: Should we allow Cell Phone Blocking? (Read 3095 times)

jcarter · « **on:** March 10, 2012, 01:01:34 PM »

One of the restaurants in our town installed a blocker unit in his restaurant. Some people complained, and he said that he was darn tired of people yakking on their phones and disturbing other diners. Its a small eatery and they dont provide entertainment, its a very nice laid back quiet little place.
He indicated that if the patrons dont like it, then they dont have to come to his restaurant, in other words, tough titty.

He also indicated that if a doctor or police officer wanted to come to the restaurant that he would make this known to them so they could use other methods to communicate in an emergency.

I just read that cell-phone users don't know they're being jammed. The phones just indicate that there's no service or no signal from your network. The jammer just interrupts the phone's ability to establish a link with the nearest cell-phone tower. So you dont know that you are actually being cut off with a device. I wonder if this is true. To test it, you would just have to walk outdoors.

I looked up some of the devices and yes, you can buy them. If I owned a theater I would invest in one too.
Funny that in a doctors office recently a whacky woman was really yelling into her phone, when I asked her to leave, and she did. Later my husband said, lets invent a jammer. Or a mute button that operates like a taser,,,,,,,,,Ha, thats funny.
Jane

I got this funny video from my brother, right on topic! And quite funny, no cell phones in this guys church!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/D2_c81Nnsc0

Xairbusdriver · « **Reply #1 on:** March 10, 2012, 04:55:40 PM »

Unfortunately, I doubt if these 'blockers' can discriminate between one business and another. In other words, you may be being blocked just by being next door to a business that is using one. I also question the legality of their use, even with well-placed and obvious warning signs. Simply refusing to serve a customer using a cell phone might be just as good (along with the signs asking everyone to respect others expectations of quiet enjoyment). Cell phones are not simply for non-important chatting, some are needed for 24/7 contact with children/parents/law enforcement/fire protection/medical care/etc.

As far as I know, the airwaves belong to us. Preventing me from accessing them is not an individuals right or choice. We've delegated that authority to local, state and Federal governments. They have established licensing procedures to control their use.

jcarter · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2012, 06:38:34 PM »

This is such an interesting point, if the restaurant is your turf and you warn people that there is no cell phone use, or smoking, is not that OK?
Or if you tell patrons to go outside to receive calls, or to smoke, which was quite an issue in our town. And now if you want to smoke, you have to go out and stand on the wing, oh, I mean just leave and go outside. (Thats the way its been in our house way before these rules ever happened anyway.)

And we all know that we have to be in contact with our families, police, fire and more, but about 15 years ago, we were, just not in an invasive mode.

This is such an interesting topic, there were some letters in our paper supporting both sides.
And there are enough restaurants in town that the people who are umbilically connected to their phones, can easily go elsewhere to dine.

Both sides, but if I owned the place, I would post a sign, to have the smokers and cellphone yakkers just to step outside, and if they didnt like it, then just leave.

Xairbusdriver · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2012, 09:00:34 PM »

Sorry, but the airwaves do not belong to the business owner. As a matter of fact, the cell phone freqs are being leased/paid for by the various phone companies. Blocking them is a federal offense. They are "blocked" mainly by over-powering the power needed to reach the various cell towers in the vicinity of the blocking device. That may be as little as 30 feet but it could be over a mile (with appropriate judicial permission). A sign only provides a means of notifying the authorities that the business is using an illegal device. Same rules apply to anyone owning a device that transmits radio waves. And that's all a cell phone is a radio transmitter and receiver. Same rules apply to TV/radio stations/CB/short-wave/RC modelers/wireless radios in churches/etc.

Now, is the business owner would like to build a Faraday shield completely around his building, that would probably be legal. But that would require pretty small entrance doors...

tacit · « **Reply #4 on:** March 10, 2012, 09:31:49 PM »

QUOTE(Xairbusdriver @ Mar 10 2012, 10:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I also question the legality of their use, even with well-placed and obvious warning signs.

In the United States and many other countries (including the UK) there is no question about their legality; they are against the law, full stop, and people who use them can face severe penalties. Here in the US, jamming cell phones violates the Communications Act of 1934, and each offense is punishable by an $11,000 fine, one year in prison, or both.

In France, businesses which act as venues for a public performance (concert halls, movie theaters, and so on) can apply for a license for cell phone jammers, though use by anyone else is still a crime.

However, passive blocking is not against the law, and it's quite popular in Japan and becoming popular with some businesses in the US. Passive blocking uses special wall paneling, window film, and so on, impregnated with a fine metal mesh. The walls and ceiling are covered with the paneling, and the mesh acts like a Faraday cage, blocking radio signals. In addition to blocking cell phone signals, the Faraday cage also blocks radio, TV, and WiFi signals.

A lot of businesses that are worried about corporate espionage use this kind of blocking to prevent employees or others from smuggling information out of the building via cell phone or WiFi.

jcarter · « **Reply #5 on:** March 11, 2012, 08:09:17 AM »

Very interesting, I will watch our local paper to see what evolves with this restaurant.
Maybe he will just walk out of the kitchen and tell the person yakking, to just shut it off or walk outside, like he does with somebody who lights up.
(Or do what that preacher does in that silly video my brother sent.)
Thanks for the explanations,
Jane

Bruce_F · « **Reply #6 on:** March 11, 2012, 03:44:38 PM »

Just this morning, my wife and I had breakfast in a little restaurant. We had to listen to a couple adjacent to us playing YouTube videos on their phone.

Restaurants have had signs indicating "No Shirt - No Shoes - No Service" They could just post a sign telling people to not use cell phones while inside or they will be asked to leave. But then, I'm sure that would infuriate some people who would make an even bigger fuss if management tried to enforce it.

I have seen signs in restaurants saying: We reserve the to refuse service to anyone. That could cover cell phone usage, I suppose.

I personally would post something like:
As a courtesy to all our customers,
Please refrain from using cell phones
or gaming devices while dining.

jcarter · « **Reply #7 on:** March 11, 2012, 04:22:40 PM »

You will run into impolite people all the time nowadays, so I think that placing a sign similar to your suggestion would be the way to go.

tacit · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2012, 12:19:26 AM »

QUOTE(jcarter @ Mar 11 2012, 09:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You will run into impolite people all the time nowadays, so I think that placing a sign similar to your suggestion would be the way to go.

Nowadays? It has always been that way. I was just reading a translation of the writings of a Japanese samurai from the 10th century a few days back, and he was complaining about how impolite people were becoming in his day.

jcarter · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2012, 07:10:11 AM »

Yes, I guess that is true, but it just seems that people are worse than they used to be.
We are lucky to live in this little town where people are pretty nice most of the time.

chriskleeman · « **Reply #10 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:15:41 AM »

I understand why the proprietor of the restaurant would want to block cell phone signals, having been in the business for a long time.

Where I used to work, Bistro Henry, in Manchester VT, we have a disclaimer on the menu asking our patrons for two things: No baseball caps, and no electronic devices in the dining room.

Do we get 100% compliance? Of course not. So, the staff is left to police the dining room, and we always get the "We have a babysitter and need to have our cell phone with us" or something similar. And then, of course, you have the parents who want to keep their children occupied during dinner with a game device, usually with headphones... So we ask that people put their phones on vibrate, etc., and if a guest takes a call we try to usher them out into the foyer, etc., but really, whatever happened to enjoying one's self without all these distractions? Bistro Henry is a Fine Dining establishment, and it is such a pain to have to police the customers like that.

And then there's the night that I had made a mistake on the wine list, and offered up the wrong bottle of a Rosenblum Zinfandel. The guy at the table got out his smart phone and looked it up, and then made a big fuss about it, even though he loved the wine. And after agreeing to discount the bottle, I went online and found out he had lied outright about the value of the wine apparently just to make us jump through a few hoops.

When I was young enough to have a babysitter, they were always provided with the phone number of the place or house that my parents were going to. Whatever happened to that simple concept? There is definitely a cultural shift at work here to say the least.

Cell phones are endemic to our culture at this point, but I do understand the why and wherefore of this particular restauranteur's desire to outright ban cell phones in his establishment. l certainly don't agree with outright blocking either, but it does get to a point...

Just one opinion.

Chris K

Xairbusdriver · « **Reply #11 on:** March 15, 2012, 11:43:30 AM »

After careful study of your message and perusing many of your past posts while using my well know skill of keen observation and vast mental powers, I have found what is probably the cause of your frustrations. I will grace you with my diagnosis at absolutely no cost since you are such a valuable member of this group. No, no, I insist! It's my privilege and honor!

You're getting OLD!!!

As proof, I offer your own words:

QUOTE

When I was young enough to have a babysitter

Well, there's your problem!

kimmer · « **Reply #12 on:** March 15, 2012, 12:37:11 PM »

I'm really sorry to read those blockers are illegal, 'cuz' I've seriously considered buying one.

QUOTE(chriskleeman @ Mar 15 2012, 07:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I was young enough to have a babysitter, they were always provided with the phone number of the place or house that my parents were going to. Whatever happened to that simple concept? There is definitely a cultural shift at work here to say the least.

At the risk of letting XABD know that I'm also old

... when I babysat, I always knew where folks would be and how to reach them -- and that was LONG before cell phones. Still, emergencies are one thing, but most of the folks that we listen to are just plain RUDE folks who can't seem to spend an hour eating a meal without talking to someone else. Often they talk louder on the phone than in a normal conversation, and so everyone else has to talk louder. We had some friends visit this past summer and she had 2 phones, he had 1, and they spent the entire visit bent over the darn things texting. They did talk to to us, but they missed all the sights and sounds of the coast. Really memorable vacation ... What did you see? Oh, our telephone screens and ... well, Sneakers did describe a few things as we went by.

Paddy · « **Reply #13 on:** March 15, 2012, 01:17:14 PM »

While I don't appreciate idiots talking loudly on their cellphones at restaurants any more than the rest of you, there are very good reasons to make cellphone jammers illegal.

Think about it. WHO polices the jammers? How do you ensure that the jammers are jamming signals for legitimate/benign purposes? You really can't - it opens a huge can of worms.

I cannot think of a single instance where not being allowed to smoke a cigarette could endanger anyone's health or safety (quite the opposite, in fact) whereas jamming cellphone signals could indeed cause an issue. We've all heard of those admittedly rare incidents where the use of a cellphone has gotten someone out of a life-threatening situation. Allowing unfettered use of cellphone jamming has way too much potential for abuse, by business owners, governments, etc.

Jack W · « **Reply #14 on:** March 15, 2012, 02:22:01 PM »

QUOTE(Xairbusdriver @ Mar 15 2012, 12:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>